Greek Humanism: Continued in the Teachings of Thomas Aquinas

This article is actually a sequel to my first article entitled, “A Brief History of Greek Humanism.” Its subject matter was suggested by a close friend of mine and has proven to be a very interesting study. I hope those of you who are able to read this agree.

In the past months I have become increasingly aware of the fact that philosophy is an inescapable reality. Though many of us might tend to shy away from philosophy as being only for the academic “eggheads,” it affects every one of us equally. That being true, we might ask the question, “What exactly is philosophy?” Dr. Michael Vlach, on his website, offers this definition of philosophy: “Philosophy is the attempt to think rationally and critically about the most important matters” (Vlach). Also, despite his innumerable problems, Immanuel Kant well summarizes philosophy as the attempt to answer three questions: “(1) what can I know? (2) what should I know? and (3) what may I hope?” (Vlach) By those two definitions of philosophy, it is without question that every single human being, regardless of academic or intellectual background, has contemplated philosophy. To maintain relevance, it is that backdrop we must keep in mind as we begin to examine Thomas Aquinas and his relation to Christian philosophy.

Thomas Aquinas has often been lauded as one of the greatest contributors to modern philosophy and theology, and that fact is undeniable. There is, however, room for debate when it comes to the value of such contributions.

Aquinas was brought up in a quite well-to-do family and was sent to school in preparation for service in the Roman Catholic Church. While at school, Aquinas decided to join the Dominican Order and despite several hurtles he eventually graduated with his master’s degree. During his education he became increasingly intrigued by Aristotle and ultimately became Aristotelian in his philosophy. It was Aquinas’ adherence to Aristotelian thought that changed his theology forever (Atkinson; McKinery).

As Aquinas developed his own positions on philosophy and theology he came to believe that the two could be viewed separately. Aquinas did, however, clarify his claim by observing that a study of theology was necessary at a certain point. Even at that, Aquinas’ idea was revolutionary for his day because most viewed philosophy and theology as contradictory, not complimentary. Edward Younkins, a professor at the Wheeling Jesuit University in West Virginia, stated,  “For Aquinas, the whole of human knowledge forms one all-encompassing, orderly, hierarchical system with sciences at the base, philosophy above them, and theology at the top . . . [and] that divine revelation in no way contradicts that which men discover by the use of natural reason” (Younkins).

It seems the core of the issue boils down to Aquinas’ basic view of general and special revelation. In his work, Summa Theologica, Aquinas gives us a view of what he believed about the human knowledge of God. In answer to the question of whether God is self-evident, Aquinas answered “that God exists is not self-evident” based upon the philosophical supposition that “no one can mentally admit the opposite of what is self-evident” (Aquinas). In other words, man should not have the ability to claim the opposite of what is obviously true. Aquinas then went on to answer the question of whether it can be demonstrated that God exists. He stated “‘The invisible things of Him are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made’ (Romans 1:20). But this would not be unless the existence of God could be demonstrated through the things that are made; for the first thing we must know of anything is whether it exists” (Aquinas). Therefore, Aquinas was making the point that nature is the key to demonstrating the existence of God. From that point, he then proceeded to propose five specific proofs for the existence of God, which have since become exceedingly well-known.

To summarize, Aquinas denied that the existence of God is self-evident while holding to the belief that the existence of God could be proven through the observation of nature. It is that philosophy that survives today in the form of classical apologetics and, to some degree, evidentialism. The fact is that the philosophy of Aquinas, the classical apologist, and the evidentialist have in common a basic reliance upon the rationality of the human being.

Now that we have established a very basic sketch of Aquinas’ perspective and driving principles, we can take a discerning look at how we should view those principles. Going back to Aquinas’ belief of being able to separate philosophy and theology, we must ask the question: Can this be so? According to the definitions of philosophy as stated by Dr. Vlach and Immanuel Kant, I submit that the two disciplines cannot be separated. Aquinas’ belief regarding the hierarchal structure of knowledge may well be correct; however, placing philosophy in an entirely different plane than theology is quite dangerous. This is true because, as we have already examined, “philosophy is the attempt to think rationally and critically about the most important matters” and answer the questions “(1) what can I know? (2) what should I know? and (3) what may I hope?” (Vlach) As one begins to answer those questions, he must deal with such things as the purpose of the universe, the reason for the existence of man, and even the determination of why things function the way they do. To answer such important questions rationally and critically, the possibility and place of God must be considered by the true philosopher. When the philosopher considers the possibility of God he has just crossed into the theological.

At this point it is important to clarify what is meant by the term “theological.” Aquinas viewed the term “theological” only in the context of divine revelation, which he deemed to be Scripture or what we term as special revelation (McKinery). Because of Thomas’ narrow definition of theological truth, he did not properly recognize the natural world as being God’s revelation or what we call general revelation. In his mind, the natural world only indicated God but was not actually a form of God’s revelation. According to Romans 1:19, such an assumption would be incorrect. The verse states, “That which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.” The idea behind the word “manifest” clearly carries the idea of making something known or to show openly or plainly. We see then that God reveals Himself to all men aside from any special revelation. In other words, all men have an innate knowledge or general revelation of God apart from any particular observational studies. As Paul moves to verse 20, he joins the verses with a word that shows an assigned reason. In this case, that reason is nature; God has revealed Himself through nature and the complexities of what He has created. Paul’s intention goes much deeper than what Aquinas observed. God’s creation does not simply point to Him but it truly manifests Him and His power. In short, even nature itself is a revelation of God.

In conclusion, we must not make the mistake of separating our philosophy and our theology. Philosophy, even in its attempts to find common ground between the religious and irreligious will fail. That is due to the fact that God’s revelation is clearly seen even outside the bounds of Scripture. Even before the most cautious philosopher begins his study, he is accountable to the revelation of God in nature and as a result he is biased for or against belief in God. As Romans 1 demonstrates, the claim to be able to form a neutral philosophy is a sadly naïve attempt to escape the reality of the absolutely supreme and Holy God. If we do not make this separation we will open the door to allowing humanistic paradigms into our philosophical and theological framework.

Sources:

Atkinson, Melissa S. “Aristotle and Aquinas: Intrinsic Morality versus God’s Morality.” http://rebirthofreason.com/Articles/atkinson/Aristotle_and_Aquinas_Intrinsic_Morality_versus_Gods_Morality.shtml

McKinery, Ralph. “Saint Thomas Aquinas.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 12 Jul. 1999. Rev. 30 Sept. 2009. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aquinas/

The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas. Trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province. http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm

Vlach, Michael J. “What is Philosophy?” http://www.theologicalstudies.org/articles/article/1527417/17131.htm

Younkins, Edward W. “Thomas Aquinas’ Christian Aristotelianism.” http://www.quebecoislibre.org/06/060122-5.htm